Re: [dwm] screen locker
I've been using xss at work for the last 6 months and have had no problems I didn't create myself. I've been trying to find something that will grab keyboard and mouse input, so I can see the desktop and any alerts that may pop up, and have been using xss+xkeygrab. Good stuff, especially when your co-workers walk over when you step away and can't figure out why they can't pull a prank. xkeygrab sometimes doesn't return mouse+keyboard input after being forcibly killed, so watch out on occasion. On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:57, Neale Pickett wrote: > Since the list is talking about slock, now might be an appropriate time > for me to mention again my xss project: > >http://woozle.org/~neale/src/xss/ > > This provides several single-purpose programs which allow you to build a > screen locker (or just saver) with a shell script. I set mine up to > check the entered password against an md5 hash of my password: this > means there's no need for suid root. At work, it runs kinit and unlocks > on success; this has the nice property of getting me a new kerberos > ticket at the same time. > > When I mailed the list about this in April someone responded with a neat > thing called "sinac", which is a little smaller than xss, but polls, and > only replaces one of the 6 programs in my package. Some folks may > prefer it, combined with slock or xlock: > >http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0804/5534.html > > Neale > > -- stadik.net
Re: [dwm] screen locker
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Neale Pickett wrote: > Since the list is talking about slock, now might be an appropriate time > for me to mention again my xss project: > >http://woozle.org/~neale/src/xss/ > > This provides several single-purpose programs which allow you to build a > screen locker (or just saver) with a shell script. I set mine up to > check the entered password against an md5 hash of my password: this > means there's no need for suid root. At work, it runs kinit and unlocks > on success; this has the nice property of getting me a new kerberos > ticket at the same time. > > When I mailed the list about this in April someone responded with a neat > thing called "sinac", which is a little smaller than xss, but polls, and > only replaces one of the 6 programs in my package. Some folks may > prefer it, combined with slock or xlock: > >http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0804/5534.html Thanks for the info! I have been using xautolock until now. I'll give xss a try soon. FWIW, I tried sinac before xautolock and I found that it consumed an unusual amount of CPU resources in the range of 30-50%. Perhaps there was an incompatibility with the latest Xorg server, I'm not sure. I didn't stay with it long enough to find out.
[dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - Brendan MacDonell * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 19:42 - > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:26 PM, henry atting > wrote: >> Patching works without problems but I get this warnings: >> >>dwm.c:1640: warning: 'viewnext' defined but not used >>dwm.c:1657: warning: 'viewprevious' defined but not used >> >> And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;) >> >> henry > That's because you haven't bound those functions to any keys in your > config.h. ;) Oops, sure! Thanks to all. I'm really glad I switched from awesome to dwm. If I had knewn it before it would have spared me some trouble... henry
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:26 PM, henry atting wrote: > Patching works without problems but I get this warnings: > >dwm.c:1640: warning: 'viewnext' defined but not used >dwm.c:1657: warning: 'viewprevious' defined but not used > > And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;) > > henry That's because you haven't bound those functions to any keys in your config.h. ;)
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - James Turner * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 18:43 - > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 06:09:11PM +0100, henry atting wrote: >> Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 - >> >> > 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> >>> 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> >>> The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume >> >>> it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 >> >>> codebase. >> >> >> >> Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: >> >> >> >> , >> >> | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff >> >> | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch >> >> | can't find file to patch at input line 3 >> >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> >> | The text leading up to this was: >> >> | -- >> >> | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> >> | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 >> >> | -- >> >> | File to patch: config.def.h >> >> | patching file config.def.h >> >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). >> >> | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch >> >> | can't find file to patch at input line 14 >> >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> >> | The text leading up to this was: >> >> | -- >> >> | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> >> | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 >> >> | -- >> >> | File to patch: dwm.c >> >> | patching file dwm.c >> >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). >> >> | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. >> >> | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej >> >> ` >> > >> > Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines >> > have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't >> > succeeding either. >> > >> > Kind regards, >> > --Anselm >> >> I see, great thanks >> henry > > Henry, > > Attached is an updated arrownav patch [0] that should apply to dwm tip > cleanly. > > [0] http://bsdgroup.org/files/dwm-5.4-arrownav.diff Patching works without problems but I get this warnings: dwm.c:1640: warning: ‘viewnext’ defined but not used dwm.c:1657: warning: ‘viewprevious’ defined but not used And, what should I say, it *is* not used ;) henry
[dwm] screen locker
Since the list is talking about slock, now might be an appropriate time for me to mention again my xss project: http://woozle.org/~neale/src/xss/ This provides several single-purpose programs which allow you to build a screen locker (or just saver) with a shell script. I set mine up to check the entered password against an md5 hash of my password: this means there's no need for suid root. At work, it runs kinit and unlocks on success; this has the nice property of getting me a new kerberos ticket at the same time. When I mailed the list about this in April someone responded with a neat thing called "sinac", which is a little smaller than xss, but polls, and only replaces one of the 6 programs in my package. Some folks may prefer it, combined with slock or xlock: http://lists.suckless.org/dwm/0804/5534.html Neale
Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:34:28AM -0700, Neale Pickett wrote: > James Turner writes: > > > After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on > > OpenBSD only #include is required, no need to #include > > which contains additional functions. > > My man page (Linux) says to #include . I don't have any of my > books nearby, nor do I have access to any of my older boxen (SunOS, > HP/UX, etc.) but I suspect signal.h is the portable way to do it. > > I'm not sure what the motivation is for changing this. If the concern > is size of the compiled binary, consider that including prototypes for > additional functions shouldn't change anything about the output binary; > it still links against libc6, and since #define is just a C preprocessor > directive, unused #defines won't affect the binary either. > > Neale man signal on OpenBSD also states to #include , it's just signal.h includes sys/signal.h and for the function used by dwm sys/signal.h is all that is required on OpenBSD. I don't run any other systems so if signal.h is more portable then go with it. -- James Turner BSD Group Consulting http://www.bsdgroup.org
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 06:09:11PM +0100, henry atting wrote:
> Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 -
>
> > 2008/12/13 henry atting :
> >>> 2008/12/13 henry atting :
> >>> The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume
> >>> it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4
> >>> codebase.
> >>
> >> Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way:
> >>
> >> ,
> >> | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff
> >> | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
> >> | can't find file to patch at input line 3
> >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> >> | The text leading up to this was:
> >> | --
> >> | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008
> >> | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008
> >> | --
> >> | File to patch: config.def.h
> >> | patching file config.def.h
> >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line).
> >> | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch
> >> | can't find file to patch at input line 14
> >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> >> | The text leading up to this was:
> >> | --
> >> | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008
> >> | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008
> >> | --
> >> | File to patch: dwm.c
> >> | patching file dwm.c
> >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines).
> >> | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668.
> >> | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej
> >> `
> >
> > Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines
> > have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't
> > succeeding either.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > --Anselm
>
> I see, great thanks
> henry
Henry,
Attached is an updated arrownav patch [0] that should apply to dwm tip
cleanly.
[0] http://bsdgroup.org/files/dwm-5.4-arrownav.diff
--
James Turner
BSD Group Consulting
http://www.bsdgroup.org
--- config.def.hSat Dec 13 12:39:14 2008
+++ config.def.hSat Dec 13 12:36:21 2008
@@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ static Key keys[] = {
{ MODKEY, XK_l, setmfact, {.f = +0.05}
},
{ MODKEY, XK_Return, zoom, {0} },
{ MODKEY, XK_Tab,view, {0} },
+ { MODKEY, XK_Right, viewnext, {0} },
+ { MODKEY, XK_Left, viewprevious, {0} },
{ MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_c, killclient, {0} },
{ MODKEY, XK_t, setlayout, {.v =
&layouts[0]} },
{ MODKEY, XK_f, setlayout, {.v =
&layouts[1]} },
--- dwm.c Sat Dec 13 12:39:15 2008
+++ dwm.c Sat Dec 13 12:38:48 2008
@@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ static void updatestatus(void);
static void updatetitle(Client *c);
static void updatewmhints(Client *c);
static void view(const Arg *arg);
+static void viewnext(const Arg *arg);
+static void viewprevious(const Arg *arg);
static int xerror(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
static int xerrordummy(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
static int xerrorstart(Display *dpy, XErrorEvent *ee);
@@ -1631,6 +1633,40 @@ view(const Arg *arg) {
seltags ^= 1; /* toggle sel tagset */
if(arg->ui & TAGMASK)
tagset[seltags] = arg->ui & TAGMASK;
+ arrange();
+}
+
+void
+viewnext(const Arg *arg) {
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for(i = 0; i < LENGTH(tags); i++) {
+ if((1 << i & TAGMASK) == tagset[seltags]) {
+ seltags ^= 1;
+ if(i == LENGTH(tags) - 1)
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << 0 & TAGMASK;
+ else
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << (i + 1) & TAGMASK;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ arrange();
+}
+
+void
+viewprevious(const Arg *arg) {
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for(i = 0; i < LENGTH(tags); i++) {
+ if((1 << i & TAGMASK) == tagset[seltags]) {
+ seltags ^= 1;
+ if(i == 0)
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << (LENGTH(tags) - 1) &
TAGMASK;
+ else
+ tagset[seltags] = 1 << (i - 1) & TAGMASK;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
arrange();
}
Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3
James Turner writes: > After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on > OpenBSD only #include is required, no need to #include > which contains additional functions. My man page (Linux) says to #include . I don't have any of my books nearby, nor do I have access to any of my older boxen (SunOS, HP/UX, etc.) but I suspect signal.h is the portable way to do it. I'm not sure what the motivation is for changing this. If the concern is size of the compiled binary, consider that including prototypes for additional functions shouldn't change anything about the output binary; it still links against libc6, and since #define is just a C preprocessor directive, unused #defines won't affect the binary either. Neale
Re: [dwm] xprop patch
Hello,
It is now useless to close stdin:
--- orig/dwm.c 2008-12-13 18:05:32.0 +0100
+++ dwm/dwm.c 2008-12-13 18:09:16.0 +0100
@@ -343,7 +343,6 @@
Arg a = {.ui = ~0};
Layout foo = { "", NULL };
- close(STDIN_FILENO);
view(&a);
lt[sellt] = &foo;
while(stack)
Regards
Fred
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:54 - > 2008/12/13 henry atting : >>> 2008/12/13 henry atting : >>> The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume >>> it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 >>> codebase. >> >> Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: >> >> , >> | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff >> | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch >> | can't find file to patch at input line 3 >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> | The text leading up to this was: >> | -- >> | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 >> | -- >> | File to patch: config.def.h >> | patching file config.def.h >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). >> | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch >> | can't find file to patch at input line 14 >> | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? >> | The text leading up to this was: >> | -- >> | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 >> | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 >> | -- >> | File to patch: dwm.c >> | patching file dwm.c >> | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). >> | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. >> | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej >> ` > > Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines > have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't > succeeding either. > > Kind regards, > --Anselm I see, great thanks henry
Re: [dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
2008/12/13 henry atting : >> 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume >> it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 >> codebase. > > Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: > > , > | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff > | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch > | can't find file to patch at input line 3 > | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > | The text leading up to this was: > | -- > | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 > | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 > | -- > | File to patch: config.def.h > | patching file config.def.h > | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). > | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch > | can't find file to patch at input line 14 > | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? > | The text leading up to this was: > | -- > | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 > | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 > | -- > | File to patch: dwm.c > | patching file dwm.c > | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). > | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. > | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej > ` Well as I said, you will need to patch it manually, since the lines have changed and the heuristic approach supported by patch(1) isn't succeeding either. Kind regards, --Anselm
[dwm] Re: dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Zitat - Anselm R Garbe * Sa Dez 13 2008 um 17:17 - > 2008/12/13 henry atting : >> - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin >> which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar. >> >>config.h:15: warning: 'readin' defined but not used > > See the README file for an example, the status text is set using > xsetroot(1) now. > Ah, I read this but thought I could do it either way. It works fine with xsetroot. >> - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for >> dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling >> through tags for 5.4? > > The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume > it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 > codebase. Mmh, I am not very familiar with patching, I did it this way: , | do! patch -p1 < dwm-5.2-arrownav.diff | missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch | can't find file to patch at input line 3 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? | The text leading up to this was: | -- | |--- config.def.h Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 | |+++ config.def.h Tue Nov 18 19:26:53 2008 | -- | File to patch: config.def.h | patching file config.def.h | Hunk #1 succeeded at 62 (offset 1 line). | missing header for unified diff at line 14 of patch | can't find file to patch at input line 14 | Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? | The text leading up to this was: | -- | |--- dwm.c Tue Sep 9 15:46:17 2008 | |+++ dwm.c Tue Nov 18 19:31:55 2008 | -- | File to patch: dwm.c | patching file dwm.c | Hunk #1 succeeded at 197 (offset -1 lines). | Hunk #2 FAILED at 1668. | 1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file dwm.c.rej ` cheers, henry dwm.c.rej Description: Binary data
Re: [dwm] dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
2008/12/13 henry atting : > - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin > which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar. > >config.h:15: warning: 'readin' defined but not used See the README file for an example, the status text is set using xsetroot(1) now. > - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for > dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling > through tags for 5.4? The tagging approach didn't change between 5.2 and 5.4, so I assume it's just a matter of making the 5.2 patch applying to the 5.4 codebase. Kind regards, --Anselm
[dwm] dwm-5.4 stdin; cycle tags
Hello, I recently switched from awesome to dwm which gives me my desktop back ;) I am currently using 5.4 from Mecurial. Two questions: - A `make clean install' does install dwm but it cannot read from stdin which prevents me from displaying time and date on the toolbar. config.h:15: warning: ‘readin’ defined but not used - I found a patch for cycling through tags in this group but it is for dwm-5.2 and apparently does not work for 5.4. How can I set up cycling through tags for 5.4? Cheers, henry
Re: [dwm] dwm on tablet pc
> I will try to get it > working with devilspie executing a perl script and issuing wmctrl. Dead end. The perl script works, but devilspie is only acting on windows, which are cretaed, but not on those, destroyed, and wmctrl does get a list of windows from the wm, but this list is sorted by creation, not by last focused. Kind regards, joten
Re: [dwm] dwm on tablet pc
> getting the buttons working was a bit of a voyage (all 12 mins of > it) : Yes, if the only problem is to get the buttons of the tablet pc working with X, than 12 mins would be far enough. > patch set to do what? I do not have a convertible, therefor no hardware keyboard, but I want at least be able to type a URL, which is possible with cellwriter (onscreen keyboard). => patch for changing the focus model. And it would be nice to launch my favourite apps with not more then two clicks (two button mouse aka pen). => patch for a launch bar and dmenu with the abillity to click on entries. But so far it seems, nobody has already done this. Cheerio!
Re: [dwm] dwm on tablet pc
2008/12/12 : >> Try dwm-gtx. Onscreenkeyboards should work with it. :) > Thanks for the hint. I tried your version of dwm, and cellwriter works. > What is the essential part for this to work? > > Getting cw to work is the first step. I also tried the mouse > actions for the bar, which are already implemented in dwm, but > especially those with MODKEY do not work in conjunction with cw. There > would still be much work to do regarding a clickable bar and of course > a clickable version of dmenu for application launching. > > @yy: Emulating a 5 buttons mouse would only be possible by implementing > onscreen buttons, I think, causing a similar amount of work. > > I am not a c programmer - writing a small patch is possible, but not > more - I am more a "script kiddie" ;-) Atm I am using openbox and > fbpanel, but I am missing dynamic tiling. Of course there are "tile" > and "whaw", but they are not sufficient for me. I will try to get it > working with devilspie executing a perl script and issuing wmctrl. I think for tablet pcs, there must be a less suckish onscreen keyboard with some extensions which allow integration with dwm, wether as patch of dwm.c (which would be the easiest since it doesnt require any additional communication between dwm and a some kind of a input event client) or as external app using some x property to communicate with dwm. In a first attempt this should be a patch however. Kind regards, --Anselm
Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3
2008/12/13 Frederic Chardon : > 2008/12/13 James Turner : >> After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on >> OpenBSD only #include is required, no need to #include >> which contains additional functions. > > Same for FreeBSD (and probably all other *BSD). Would it be possible > to include this one line mainstream? > Fred Yes, will do that. Kind regards, --Anselm
Re: [dwm] dwm-5.3
2008/12/13 James Turner : > After taking some time and looking at the different signal headers on > OpenBSD only #include is required, no need to #include > which contains additional functions. > > -- > James Turner > BSD Group Consulting > http://www.bsdgroup.org > > Hello, Same for FreeBSD (and probably all other *BSD). Would it be possible to include this one line mainstream? Fred
Re: [dwm] dwm and dualhead
* Mate Nagy [2008-12-10 21:18]: > Not on the V100, and the webcam is from some obscure far > east manufacturer with no website to speak of and no open specs. There > is a halfassed driver project that hasn't made progress in a couple of > years. Have you tried gspcav? http://mxhaard.free.fr/index.html -- cheers stanio_
